17:00:02 <nirik> #startmeeting FESCO (2016-04-22)
17:00:02 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Apr 22 17:00:02 2016 UTC.  The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:02 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:02 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2016-04-22)'
17:00:02 <nirik> #meetingname fesco
17:00:02 <nirik> #chair maxamillion dgilmore number80 jwb nirik paragan jsmith kalev sgallagh
17:00:02 <nirik> #topic init process
17:00:02 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco'
17:00:02 <zodbot> Current chairs: dgilmore jsmith jwb kalev maxamillion nirik number80 paragan sgallagh
17:00:52 <jkurik> .hello jkurik
17:00:53 <zodbot> jkurik: jkurik 'Jan Kurik' <jkurik@redhat.com>
17:00:57 <nirik> jwb and jsmith were both out today... not sure we will have quorum.
17:01:02 <maxamillion> .hello maxamillion
17:01:03 <zodbot> maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' <maxamillion@gmail.com>
17:01:05 <paragan> .hello pnemade
17:01:09 <zodbot> paragan: pnemade 'Parag Nemade' <pnemade@redhat.com>
17:01:14 * kalev is here but typing on the phone.
17:01:38 <kalev> .hello kalev
17:01:39 <zodbot> kalev: kalev 'Kalev Lember' <klember@redhat.com>
17:01:56 <sesivany> .fas eischmann
17:01:56 <zodbot> sesivany: eischmann 'Jiri Eischmann' <eischmann@redhat.com>
17:02:02 * dgilmore will be delayed 15 minutes or so
17:02:32 <nirik> we have 5 with dgilmore if we wait for him. ;)
17:05:00 <nirik> #topic #1444 Updates deliverables
17:05:00 <nirik> .fesco 1444
17:05:00 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1444
17:05:01 <zodbot> nirik: #1444 (updates deliverables) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1444
17:06:05 <nirik> so, I guess we need several things here...
17:06:33 <nirik> input from dgilmore on what we are missing currently for updates deliverables, and then to decide the f24 ones (if we are adding/removing anything from them)
17:08:22 * paragan forgot, do we have wiki page for these deliverable list?
17:08:32 <nirik> not sure
17:09:00 <dgilmore> paragan: wiki pages do not work
17:09:01 * nirik looks
17:09:18 <dgilmore> we need something better, ideally with an API
17:09:38 <nirik> right, some thought was PDC could do this, but not sure if thats true
17:09:45 <paragan> okay
17:09:56 <dgilmore> PDC records what is built in composes
17:10:09 <dgilmore> it does not define what is supposed to be
17:10:52 <paragan> how can we review update deliverables for Fedora 24 now?
17:11:18 <dgilmore> paragan: we have never had a list of updates deliverables
17:11:32 <dgilmore> paragan: so its a whole net new thing
17:12:09 <nirik> well, there's serveral things here.
17:12:36 <nirik> what is built (PDC), what should be built (release blocking deliverables) and what should be updated after release (this ticket)
17:13:08 <maxamillion> nirik: +1
17:13:20 <dgilmore> nirik: right
17:13:41 <nirik> there was a suggestion made for the second one we have a tool that gathers that from the pungi config (ie, the place where it would be set)
17:13:52 <nirik> but not sure what we can do for updating things.
17:14:04 <nirik> dgilmore: what do you think is missing from: ""updated RPM repos, atomic repos, atomic installer, cloud base image, cloud base vagrant image, cloud atomic image, cloud atomic vagrant image, docker base image."
17:14:11 <maxamillion> I imagine something that hooks into the pungi config pagure repo would be a good choice there
17:14:42 <maxamillion> (for the second thing)
17:14:48 <dgilmore> nirik: I think that is probably all we need
17:15:21 <nirik> so where do we store that list? and does it change with f24?
17:15:35 <dgilmore> no idea
17:16:01 <dgilmore> the only new deliverables in f24 was a couple of new labs
17:16:08 <nirik> I agree a wiki page sucks, but it would be something we could do now.
17:16:27 <kalev> ok, I got to a keyboard now :)
17:16:40 <kalev> I remember thinking about iso respins and thinking that it might make sense to change our repo structure to make this easier
17:17:01 <kalev> right now F24 images get produced from the base "fedora" or Everything or however we call the repo and the repo is frozen after the images are cut
17:17:27 <kalev> I was thinking that we may want to extend that to updated deliverables, so the when we cut an updated image we cut it from another frozen repo
17:17:30 <kalev> let me explain:
17:18:12 <kalev> right now we only have "fedora" and "updates" repos enabled in a regular fedora installation
17:18:18 <dgilmore> kalev: today we do not update any isos
17:18:22 <kalev> where fedora is the frozen base repo where images were cut from
17:18:26 <dgilmore> śo doing so is something new
17:18:33 <kalev> dgilmore: yea, but I understood that the ticket is about maybe starting doing it in the future
17:19:05 <kalev> so if we start putting out updated images, we can't base it on the "fedora" repo because it's already frozen
17:19:06 <dgilmore> kalev: it could be an option
17:19:25 <kalev> and we can't easily base it on "fedora" + "updates" either because updates is constantly moving
17:19:31 <dgilmore> the ticket was about being crystal clear what things are going to be updated post release
17:19:47 <kalev> so I was thinking that whenever we have a new updated image coming up, we create a new frozen tree for it
17:19:54 <kalev> right, I just wanted to get my amazing idea out :)
17:20:01 <dgilmore> okay :)
17:20:21 <nirik> right now the folks doing the live respins have been doing them everytime a kernel goes stable in updates...
17:20:44 <Southern_Gentlem> nirik,  yes
17:20:49 <kalev> so when we have a F24.1 image update coming out, we'd also create a new "updates-24.1" repo that sits on top of "fedora"
17:21:22 <kalev> but is different from the regular "updates" repo in the sense that while "updates" keeps on flowing, we can freeze "updates-24.1" and use it to cut a new updated image
17:21:37 <maxamillion> wait, why are we creating a new repo?
17:21:40 <nirik> anyhow, I think thats above the scope of this ticket. This is just asking for a list of what things we currently plan to do updates for.
17:22:05 <kalev> and after that, we'll also have the nice side effect that "updates" would be much smaller since the delta to the frozen "updates-24.1" would be much smaller
17:22:09 <kalev> anyway, EOF here :)
17:22:15 <kalev> sorry for stealing the meeting!
17:22:20 <paragan> how many such updates we plan to provide after a stable release?
17:22:34 <paragan> that many repo trees will be needed then
17:22:38 <Southern_Gentlem> kalev,  then those imageswould have to go back QA again and they dont have time
17:22:48 <dgilmore> kalev: I think I would like to see that drawn out. Just because I am not seeing how it makes updates smaller
17:22:56 <kalev> Southern_Gentlem: yes of course; we'd need to QA all images we put out ...
17:23:18 <kalev> dgilmore: yep, I can write it all up and put it in the ticket
17:23:27 <nirik> please make a new ticket for it.
17:23:33 <nirik> it's something new. ;)
17:23:34 <kalev> ok
17:24:35 <paragan> I think if possible we can start with wiki page for F24 update deliverable for this ticket.
17:24:58 <nirik> proposal: for now, until we have something better, make a https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/Updating_deliverables/Fedora24 with the currently agreed list
17:24:59 <dgilmore> kalev: it is something different
17:25:25 <dgilmore> nirik: missing is teh frequency of updates
17:25:48 <dgilmore> Atomic deliverables are two weeks
17:25:55 <dgilmore> repos are generally daily
17:26:01 <nirik> yeah, that would need to be per updated thing right?
17:26:11 <dgilmore> but docker, and cloud images, when do we want to do them?
17:26:22 <dgilmore> maybe monthly or two weekly
17:26:30 <dgilmore> right
17:26:41 <maxamillion> cloud SIG wants the cloud base image to be monthly
17:27:15 <maxamillion> there's a ticket in the cloud WG for it -> https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/138
17:27:20 <nirik> ok, so perhaps we revisit this next week and gather input from groups?
17:27:35 <maxamillion> nirik: +1
17:27:46 <paragan> nirik, +1
17:27:54 <maxamillion> I would volunteer to collect the data but I won't be here next Friday
17:28:03 <maxamillion> well ... I'm probably not going to be here
17:28:15 <maxamillion> I'll try to be pending connectivity while traveling
17:28:17 <nirik> maxamillion: I can make a draft wiki page and you can talk to folks and fill it in?
17:28:25 <maxamillion> nirik: +1 - let's do that
17:28:51 <nirik> #action nirik to make draft wiki page, maxamillion will ask groups for feedback and we will revist next week.
17:28:55 <nirik> any objections to that?
17:29:01 <paragan> no
17:29:04 <maxamillion> no
17:29:50 <nirik> #topic #1555 Please clarify updates policy for security issues
17:29:50 <nirik> .fesco 1555
17:29:50 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1555
17:29:51 <zodbot> nirik: #1555 (Please clarify updates policy for security issues) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1555
17:31:03 <nirik> overall I don't mind the phrasing, but I am worried that it's overbroad...
17:32:26 <kalev> I like the direction where this is going, as in reducing the updates firehose
17:32:29 <nirik> it should apply when upgrading an older release is incompatible... if it's not, I don't see why you wouldn't just do it.
17:32:56 <maxamillion> nirik: +1
17:33:04 <paragan> right so the existing text looks good
17:33:15 <maxamillion> yeah, I think so
17:33:53 * nirik looks at how to rephrase it so it doesn't seem overbroad
17:34:17 <dgilmore> kalev: reducing the updates firehose will not happen with words
17:34:22 <nirik> I guess it's better in context of the page it will be in.
17:35:42 <nirik> so what do we want to do here? vote? wait a week? sgallagh had some feedback in ticket...
17:36:59 <dgilmore> can we automate the checks
17:37:11 <dgilmore> and filing of tickets
17:37:23 <maxamillion> I'm happy with the wording, but others seem to have some feedback and since sgallagh is one of those people and isn't here, I'd vote to wait
17:37:36 <nirik> not that I can see...
17:37:41 <dgilmore> say have a check in bodhi that detects version bump, and files tickets, does some extra testing
17:37:57 <nirik> the problem is there's no standard versioning.
17:38:07 <dgilmore> I think we should wait until sgallagh is here, as he seems to think there was something not right
17:38:08 <nirik> version 1.0 and 2.0 could be 100% compatible
17:38:14 <paragan> does taskotron can do that testing?
17:38:23 <kalev> nirik: maybe wait a week before voting, yes, so that jsmith is actually here and the edits that sgallagh wanted are done etc
17:38:28 <nirik> and version 1.0.1 and 1.0.1.1 could be completely incompatibe. ;)
17:38:38 <dgilmore> paragan: well we could do abi testing
17:38:48 <dgilmore> nirik: right,
17:38:48 <nirik> thats planned/almost in place now.
17:39:12 <nirik> #info will wait another week for more feedback and others present
17:39:19 <tflink> abi testing is in progress, the task is currently under review and will likely be in our dev instance in the next week or two
17:39:31 <dgilmore> tflink: awesome
17:39:34 <nirik> excellent
17:39:40 <nirik> #topic #1566 Review of release blocking deliverables for F24
17:39:40 <nirik> .fesco 1566
17:39:40 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1566
17:39:45 <zodbot> nirik: #1566 (Review of release blocking deliverables for F24) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1566
17:39:52 <nirik> this is the second part of the other ticket... the what blocks release.
17:40:27 <dgilmore> jkurik was the one not updating the list as new delieverables arrived
17:40:42 <nirik> so, I guess here we should check the current list and see if we can think of anything missing?
17:41:14 <dgilmore> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Astronomy_Spin
17:41:32 <dgilmore> I do not think any of the new spins are release blocking
17:41:50 <nirik> agreed
17:41:53 <dgilmore> the change list has one spin
17:41:59 <dgilmore> I thought there was two
17:42:05 <nirik> CInnamon?
17:42:13 <nirik> or was that added in f23?
17:42:33 <jkurik> Cinamon was in F23
17:42:37 <maxamillion> I thought that was f24
17:42:39 <maxamillion> errr
17:42:40 <maxamillion> f23
17:42:42 * maxamillion can't type
17:45:25 <nirik> proposal: add Astronomy spin, approve list
17:45:56 <kalev> +1
17:45:58 <maxamillion> +1
17:46:25 <nirik> +1
17:46:29 <dgilmore> Fedora-Cloud-Atomic was renamed to Fedora-Atomic
17:47:00 <dgilmore> Atomic installer is missing
17:47:06 <paragan> +1
17:47:14 <dgilmore> we do not do Multi boot media any more
17:47:37 <dgilmore> we added arm Docker base image
17:47:52 <dgilmore> so -1
17:47:57 <dgilmore> the list needs fixed
17:48:10 <nirik> dgilmore: ok who is going to fix it? you? jkurik ?
17:48:25 <dgilmore> it is jkurik's job afaik
17:48:30 <jkurik> nirik:  I can fix the list
17:48:41 <jkurik> dgilmore: thanks for the input
17:48:45 <nirik> ok, so do we want to wait and review it next week? or ?
17:48:52 <dgilmore> we also moved a bunch of paths around
17:49:08 <dgilmore> Spins became Labs
17:49:23 <dgilmore> Live and Images became Spins
17:49:29 <nirik> ok, then lets revist next week after all the fixes... that seems best
17:49:38 <paragan> right
17:49:58 <jkurik> btw: to maintain the list, I need an input of these changes
17:50:16 <dgilmore> jkurik: we really need something that has an API
17:50:23 <jkurik> these changes do to go through Change process
17:50:25 <dgilmore> and can be used programatically
17:50:35 <jkurik> so I am typically not aware of it
17:50:47 <dgilmore> jkurik: some of the changes went through the Change process
17:50:50 <dgilmore> and some didnt
17:50:59 <dgilmore> the ones that didn't are my fault
17:51:27 <nirik> It would be nice to have a API, but not sure it would have helped with this unless someone was updating it...
17:51:50 <dgilmore> nirik: well if we have an API, we validate the compsoe
17:51:59 <dgilmore> and it yells when things are wrong
17:52:29 <dgilmore> it will require writinga  compose validation tool
17:52:31 <nirik> hum, I guess.
17:52:55 <nirik> ok, anyhow...
17:53:04 <nirik> #info will revisit this next week after it's been updated.
17:53:21 <dgilmore> nirik: the list ignores torrents also
17:53:23 <jkurik> OK, so moving the list from wiki to pagure (a CSV file ?) will help
17:53:28 <jkurik> ?
17:53:32 <dgilmore> jkurik: maybe
17:53:40 <dgilmore> jkurik: lets talk
17:53:42 <nirik> dgilmore: we should add them. They are such an afterthought. ;)
17:53:53 <dgilmore> nirik: indeed
17:54:13 <nirik> perhaps pungi could make the .torrent files? anyhow, out of scope for this talk
17:54:30 <nirik> #topic #1568 F25 Self Contained Changes
17:54:30 <nirik> .fesco 1568
17:54:30 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1568
17:54:31 <zodbot> nirik: #1568 (F25 Self Contained Changes) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1568
17:55:04 <dgilmore> I am okay with using storaged
17:55:22 <maxamillion> +1
17:55:26 <dgilmore> +1
17:55:48 <nirik> well, there was discussion on list where it was unclear if workstation wanted to use it or not
17:55:50 <kalev> I am a bit disappointed that it's a different project instead of fixing udisks, but that's how it is I guess
17:55:55 <kalev> +1
17:55:59 <paragan> +1
17:56:17 <nirik> "I don't think that Workstation wants to stray from upstream GNOME, which uses udisks2"
17:57:01 <maxamillion> I thought that upstream GNOME was going to make the change also but is still using udisks2 today
17:57:15 <maxamillion> I could be mistaken, but I thought that I read that somewehre
17:57:18 <maxamillion> somewhere*
17:57:39 <tsmetana> maxamillion: upstream gnome doesn't care about the features storaged brings...
17:58:14 <nirik> is this change replacing udisks2 package completely? or just moving blivet/cockpit to using it?
17:58:26 <kalev> the latter as I understand it
17:58:43 <dgilmore> nirik: storaged says it is a drop in replacement extending on udisks
17:58:44 <tsmetana> nirik: cockpit already uses storaged and blivet too afiak
17:58:53 <dgilmore> so it should not really matter
17:59:07 <nirik> I guess not...
17:59:11 <nirik> ok, +1 then
17:59:26 <nirik> #agreed Self contained changes approved (+5,0,0)
17:59:47 <nirik> #topic #1570 F24 Changes not in ON_QA status (<100% completed)
17:59:47 <nirik> .fesco 1570
17:59:47 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1570
17:59:48 <zodbot> nirik: #1570 (F24 Changes not in ON_QA status (<100% completed)) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1570
18:00:39 <nirik> anything on the list that we should look at firing the contingency plan on?
18:01:28 <dgilmore> cloud-motd looks like it should be done, and the bug has not been updated
18:01:40 <jkurik> dgilmore: yes, I think so as well
18:01:44 <paragan> LiveUSBCreator as Primary Downloadable?
18:01:50 <jkurik> also "The GNU C Library version 2.23" seems to be done
18:01:57 <maxamillion> nirik: what is the "contingency plan"?
18:02:14 <dgilmore> I think golang is done also
18:02:19 <paragan> maxamillion, its written in individual Change pages
18:02:27 <maxamillion> paragan: ohhh ok
18:02:28 <nirik> maxamillion: each change has to have one... in case they aren't ready
18:02:34 <maxamillion> gotchya
18:03:21 <dgilmore> maxamillion: didnt they enable atomic developer mode in the f23 builds about a month back?
18:04:02 <maxamillion> dgilmore: I'd have to go check, I don't remember ... but I know it was being discussed
18:04:19 <maxamillion> I just ping'd some folks asking if they know the status of the two Atomic related Changes
18:04:42 <dgilmore> I think a lange number of these are done and people have just been bad at updating the bugs
18:05:27 <nirik> yeah, seems so.
18:05:27 <jkurik> I have been trying to chase owners of these Changes, however not all I was able to catch
18:06:07 <nirik> so, shall we just keep trying to update and wait a week? or ?
18:06:11 <jkurik> I can continue to chase owners till the next meeting
18:06:18 <paragan> we can wait for a week
18:06:49 <dgilmore> are tehre any that look like they are not done?
18:06:55 <dgilmore> that we can go and punt
18:07:09 <mbriza> regarding the liveusb-creator, kalev asked me to come here today so i can answer your questions about its status if you want
18:07:11 <dgilmore> Shenandoah 1.0 seems sketchy
18:07:18 <jkurik> I am not sure about the Erlang-18
18:07:30 <dgilmore> jkurik: the packages are in
18:07:39 <dgilmore> at least some of them
18:08:03 <dgilmore> erlang-18.3.1-1.fc24 is in f24
18:08:05 <jkurik> dgilmore: yes, that was I was told; part of the Change is done, some packages are missing
18:08:15 <maxamillion> this one needs to have a pull request merged for the atomic json input but it appears done https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303546
18:08:34 <nirik> I don't see any obviously not done yet.
18:08:39 <maxamillion> nirik: +1
18:08:44 <dgilmore> not ssure where the removal of librtkaio from glibc is
18:08:45 <nirik> mbriza: can you give us a quick update? how is it looking?
18:09:10 <mbriza> nirik: well we had a test day on tuesday which was the first day somebody except a few folks around me actually used the tool
18:09:17 <mbriza> so naturally there was quite a lot of bugs
18:09:22 <mbriza> (about 30)
18:09:39 <mbriza> i have fixed between 15-20 of them so far
18:09:46 <nirik> thats actually good. ;) finding them now is much better than later....
18:10:08 <mbriza> i think there are about 10 severe bugs left to fix which i'll do next week, nothing seems to complicated to do
18:10:16 <mbriza> *too
18:10:58 <sesivany> I think the tool itself will be ready, I'd worry about if we can make it on time in releng and websites.
18:11:01 <mbriza> other thing is we're working on setting things up for official windows builds in koji (with dgilmore and stickster]
18:11:15 <nirik> yeah, thats our next topic actually. ;)
18:11:33 <nirik> so, anymore on this? or wait a week and try and update things and revisit next meeting?
18:11:34 <jkurik> dgilmore: librtkaio should already be removed - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308554#c3
18:11:45 <sesivany> for the websites...
18:12:06 <dgilmore> jkurik: cool. so people suck at updating bugs :(
18:12:16 <sesivany> I'm currently arguing with them that the tool is really what we want to offer Windows users as primary downloadable.
18:12:17 <nirik> dgilmore: no surprises there sadly. ;(
18:12:44 <dgilmore> sesivany: lets cover that in teh next topic
18:12:52 <sesivany> ok
18:13:04 <nirik> #info will wait for a week and try and update all non 100% changes
18:13:07 <nirik> #topic #1571 need guideance of what exactly needs to be built from source for Fedora Media Writer
18:13:07 <nirik> .fesco 1571
18:13:07 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1571
18:13:08 <zodbot> nirik: #1571 (need guideance of what exactly needs to be built from source for Fedora Media Writer) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1571
18:13:41 <dgilmore> nirik: so I think at this point #proposal chase up change owners with baseball bats to update bugs and review next week, if bugs not updated change is punted to F25
18:13:53 <dgilmore> too late :)
18:13:53 <nirik> so, building windows binaries is just a new area to us...
18:14:00 <nirik> dgilmore: indeed. ;)
18:14:04 <dgilmore> it is a very new area
18:14:27 <kalev> we have a mingw crosscompiler stack with a bunch of precompiled libraries
18:14:34 <dgilmore> koji has long supported building windows binaries
18:14:35 <kalev> but sadly it doesn't have python
18:14:47 <mbriza> upstream python can't be built using mingw
18:14:53 <dgilmore> kalev: python seems to be the only missing thing
18:15:27 <kalev> elmarco had a mingw-python package somewhere, let me see if I can find it
18:15:38 <mbriza> in arch, yes
18:15:41 <kalev> aha, https://elmarco.fedorapeople.org/mingw/mingw-python-2.7.1-1.src.rpm
18:15:48 <kalev> from 2011 :)
18:16:05 <dgilmore> it shoudl be fine :P
18:16:23 <nirik> probibly that has the big patch needed to make python build?
18:16:30 <dgilmore> koji can build windows objects natively in windows
18:16:38 <kalev> nirik: yep, it has that
18:17:23 <mbriza> https://github.com/Alexpux/MINGW-packages/tree/master/mingw-w64-python2 this is a bit more up to date but still... ~80 patches
18:17:47 <dgilmore> the maintainece cost of python in mingw seems high
18:17:48 <nirik> thats a lot... but perhaps thats better than having to setup windows and deal wih binary stuff...
18:17:51 <kalev> I could commit to reviwing the package if anyone wants to submit it to review and maintain it
18:18:03 * kalev has done a bunch of mingw related things in fedora.
18:18:20 <dgilmore> the cost of building and maintaining python, qt, etc on windows natively seems high also
18:18:39 <nirik> if we did get the mingw path working we would still need windows for signing ? or how does signing with mingw work?
18:18:43 <maxamillion> kalev: I don't want to commit to it entirely, but I'm willing to look at it to see if I think that's something I'd be capable of doing
18:18:57 <mbriza> signing should work in linux using some tool from mono
18:19:06 <mbriza> didn't get it to work so far though
18:19:07 <dgilmore> the cost of seting up and maintaining windows build environment in koji is afaik not that high
18:19:28 <nirik> dgilmore: it's unpleasent tho. ;)
18:19:38 <dgilmore> nirik: sure
18:19:40 * jsmith joins very very late
18:19:52 <nirik> and means infrastructure can't say they are 100% open source anymore, which will make me sad.
18:20:04 <dgilmore> we would need to decide if its okay to use upstream binaries of the things we want
18:20:31 <dgilmore> nirik: sure: but the windows machines at least only run when doing builds
18:20:38 <mbriza> nirik: for f25, a mac port of the tool will (i hope) be ready and then you can't really use just opensource  tools
18:20:47 <dgilmore> so maybe 95% of the time we are 100% open
18:21:00 <nirik> uh huh.
18:21:01 <kalev> yeah, it's possible to set up a mac crosscompiler, but the libraries are non-free so we can't put them in fedora, sadly
18:21:33 <dgilmore> kalev: can we build against darwin?
18:22:23 <dgilmore> it is really useful to have a native windows tool to get people able to use Fedora easily
18:22:27 <kalev> dgilmore: I don't remember the details, but I think it was possible to take most bits from darwin, but there was something else that was non-free that was required
18:22:42 <dgilmore> but it comes with costs, which ones do we want to pay?
18:22:43 <kalev> epienbro looked at this years ago, I wasn't involved with the mac crosscompiler stuff
18:22:45 <nirik> at this point since kalev and maxamillion offered to help, I'd say we should try and get mingw working... if it becomes clear thats no go, we fallback to the windows stuff.
18:23:21 <mbriza> i think you have to use some parts of xcode which are not free
18:23:31 <kalev> just to be clear, I don't want to sign up to being primary mingw-python package maintainer, but I'm more than happy to help drag this through the review process
18:24:22 <kalev> and help clean it up so it actually builds after 5 years
18:25:09 <nirik> mbriza: what do you think? willing to try that? or ?
18:25:14 <maxamillion> kalev: yeah, if I spend some time looking at it and feel like I'm capable of doing so, I'll maintain it
18:25:27 <kalev> awesome, thanks maxamillion
18:25:38 <maxamillion> kalev: I appreciate you being willing to whip it into shape though :)
18:26:13 <mbriza> nirik: honestly, i'd rather go with the windows path... or wine... but still with a binary package from the upstream... but on the other hand, i'm not really a huge opensource purist
18:27:39 <dgilmore> at this point we have about a week or so to get everything in place and working
18:27:42 <kalev> re signing, elmarco was working on tools related to windows packaging, might be worth asking him about that and see if we have anything for signing
18:28:04 <mbriza> kalev: there's a signtool (or signcode?) tool from mono, it's in fedora
18:28:08 <mbriza> i think mono-devel package
18:28:11 <kalev> ahh, cool
18:28:28 <mbriza> i haven't got it to work yet but OTH i spent like 15 minutes doing so
18:28:29 <nirik> dgilmore: I am not sure any path makes that practical, but we can try
18:28:40 <kalev> anyway, elmarco is on #desktop in the RH internal irc if anyone needs him
18:28:59 <dgilmore> nirik: thats our window to get it in Beta
18:28:59 <kalev> he should know what tools work and what don't
18:29:37 <nirik> well, like I said we can try... but this is all very rushed. ;(
18:29:41 * dgilmore is going to order a cert for siging windows code today
18:30:09 <nirik> ok, so where are we here?
18:30:58 <nirik> if mbriza doesnt want to use mingw, we need to decide what binaries from windows we allow building against?
18:31:52 <nirik> and should we consult legal after the comment about prebuilt binaries?
18:32:03 <mbriza> nirik: well i think i can use mingw but i also think this puts too much work on shoulders of people who could be doing something else, not just maintain a bunch of tools to build a single application
18:32:25 <nirik> well, mingw-python could well be useful for many other people too tho
18:32:49 <nirik> and we would be advancing our mission instead of ignoring it.
18:33:05 <kalev> yeah, it should definitely be useful for other people too
18:34:07 * kalev is excited to get closer to having gobject-introspection support for mingw once we get python in.
18:34:36 <mbriza> btw when you start with it, it's not just python, it's python-qt5, python-pyquery, python-requests, python-wmi and python-win32com too and all of their dependencies
18:35:48 <nirik> we have been on this for 25min now. ;)
18:35:59 <mbriza> at that point, maintaining just python doesn't cut it for the users sadly
18:37:00 <sesivany> for the record: the ticket for website changes is here: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-websites/ticket/384
18:37:02 <maxamillion> can we come to a conclusion, table it, or move on? I need to go afk
18:37:14 <maxamillion> need to go soon*
18:37:31 <kalev> same here, I would have to leave very soon
18:37:58 <nirik> well, like I said, I would prefer the mingw path, but I am not doing the work, so it seems wrong for me to decide that. ;)
18:38:22 <maxamillion> nirik: as FESCo we make decisions on all sorts of stuff we don't actually do the work on ;)
18:38:48 <dgilmore> nirik: well we have about a week to have it done for f24
18:38:51 <nirik> sure, but usually it's approval/disapproval... not "we want you to do it this way"
18:39:03 <maxamillion> nirik: fair
18:39:21 <nirik> at this point I am personally thinking we should punt it to f25... but I suspect that won't be popular.
18:39:42 <maxamillion> let's see if we can get it done in the next week, if not we can punt
18:40:35 <dgilmore> nirik: that is the only way to give us the time to get it right
18:40:39 <kalev> I would definitely like to have it as _a_ download option for F24, but maybe it would be prudent to punt the default download change to F25, yeah
18:40:48 <dgilmore> I thionk everything else is taking a shortcut
18:41:11 <nirik> I guess we could just punt and try and vote in ticket/find some way that works and update the ticket.
18:41:33 <dgilmore> I am okay with using prebuilt binaries from our upstreams in the case of a windows build
18:41:47 <maxamillion> dgilmore: +1
18:42:06 <dgilmore> because it does mean that we do not need to have a lot of resources maintaining a stack used for one thing
18:42:13 <mbriza> i agree with dgilmore
18:42:39 <nirik> so is there legal concern? or that was due to it being in fedora itself ?
18:42:40 <dgilmore> I filed the ticket because I wanted it to be a concious choice
18:42:58 <dgilmore> nirik: I am not sure
18:43:22 <nirik> well, then I would be +1 as long as legal signs off on it.
18:43:24 <dgilmore> I had asked spot about us shipping prebuilt u-boots and he said we should not do that
18:43:36 <paragan> nirik, +1
18:43:49 <maxamillion> Proposal: ship upstream built binaries for windows executables pending legal sign off
18:43:55 * spot glares
18:43:58 <dgilmore> +1
18:44:00 <spot> seriously?
18:44:08 <nirik> sorry spot
18:44:09 <dgilmore> spot: what exactly?
18:44:12 <spot> how would you like to be sure we're in license compliance?
18:44:25 <spot> we need to be distributing corresponding source.
18:44:46 <spot> its not the "someone else built it" problem that gets us (although, it makes me concerned)
18:44:54 <spot> its the "built it from what exactly"
18:45:40 <spot> does upstream provide a tarball/zip/envelope with the source code that matches the windows binaries?
18:46:02 <dgilmore> https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-344/
18:46:18 <dgilmore> upstream has the source link, windows link
18:46:47 <dgilmore> I guess we would have to ask them to be sure that the binary was built from that source
18:46:51 <spot> okay. will our distribution of that binary have a corresponding SRPM with their source?
18:47:28 <dgilmore> there will be no binary rpm
18:47:42 <dgilmore> we have no way to build a srpm
18:47:44 <nirik> there's also a bunch of other things too tho right?
18:47:48 <spot> If we distribute that binary, we have to make some sort of source offer.
18:47:49 <dgilmore> if we build it all in windows
18:47:50 <nirik> qt5, etc?
18:48:32 <spot> that _could_ be a README-SOURCE.txt with links to our copy of their source (needs to be that way in case python stops distributing source)
18:48:41 <kalev> I'll note that we already have qt5 built from source with the mingw cross compiler and it's very nicely maintained
18:48:57 <maxamillion> python, python-qt5, python-pyquery, python-requests, python-wmi, and python-win32com were all mentioned
18:49:31 <kalev> yeah, that sounds like a quite a bit of work
18:49:35 <mbriza> for the record: there are some deps and i may have misspelled the win32com package
18:49:48 <dgilmore> spot: source offer would depend on the license of the components, and of the windows binary
18:50:11 <spot> dgilmore: yes, but if we're doing this, i'm going to apply the strictest requirement to the whole lot to be sure.
18:50:18 <spot> which is essentially the GPL.
18:50:34 <spot> because who knows what it will depend on tomorrow, next year, etc.
18:51:11 <nirik> mbriza: is there a full list of requirements somewhere?
18:51:41 <dgilmore> based on spot's comments I do not think we can get everything in place for Fedora 24
18:52:07 <mbriza> nirik: i can sum up what i have installed
18:52:29 <nirik> so, if we have some more time, the mingw path may still be an option.
18:53:23 <maxamillion> dgilmore: +1
18:53:36 <maxamillion> this needs to move out to F25, there's no way this is going to be solved in the next week
18:53:40 <nirik> so do we want to vote on something here? or just continue in ticket with any decisions?
18:53:44 <maxamillion> well, there's very little chance
18:54:01 <sesivany> were we so strict for the old LUC for Windows, too?
18:54:04 <jsmith> nirik: Do we have a proposal?
18:54:16 <jsmith> nirik: I'm not sure exactly what I'd be voting on, to be honest...
18:54:21 <dgilmore> sesivany: we did not distribute it, lmacken did
18:55:06 <paragan> vote and move to F25?
18:55:10 <mbriza> nirik: MinGW, Qt5, Python2 (with csselect, gettext-windows, lxml, PyInstaller, pyquery, pywin32, requests, setuptools, WMI)
18:55:15 <nirik> jsmith: well, I guess the most obvious one is "move the usb creator change to f25"
18:55:18 <dgilmore> nirik: so we have to have all the sources available
18:55:24 <mbriza> nirik: and SIP and PyQT5
18:56:06 * spot notes that a directory on the alt server that the user is informed exists (and is kept current) would meet this requirement
18:56:20 <mbriza> spot: how are we going to do mac builds?
18:56:51 <dgilmore> mbriza: I do not think spot is saying we can not do teh build on windows or osx
18:57:10 <dgilmore> but we need to gather all the sources and be sure that the sources match the binary
18:57:13 <spot> dgilmore: yes. that is correct.
18:57:19 <sesivany> can at least mbriza distribute it himself for F24 and we would just link to it on the wiki like we did for the old version?
18:57:55 <dgilmore> sesivany: he can, but it can not be the primary workstation deliverable
18:57:57 * nirik would think that would be fine.
18:58:01 <mbriza> dgilmore: i'm not really sure you can guarantee it with mac libraries
18:58:07 <nirik> and also get some valuable feedback
18:58:20 <sesivany> dgilmore: sure, the primary deliverable is off table clearly now.
18:59:09 <dgilmore> mbriza: I guess we should formally ask legal and know exactly what we will ship that is not under a open license
18:59:49 <nirik> ok, we are at 2hours now... shall we close out?
19:00:05 <maxamillion> nirik: please yes
19:00:06 <dgilmore> nirik: I think so
19:00:10 <paragan> yes please
19:00:13 <nirik> we had another topic and open floor, but we are over time...
19:00:22 <nirik> oh...
19:00:25 <nirik> #topic Next weeks chair
19:00:29 <nirik> who wants it next week?
19:00:35 <dgilmore> #action dgilmore to work with mbriza and legal on issues around non linux builds
19:01:02 <jsmith> I can take it
19:01:24 <mbriza> dgilmore: first we'll decide if using python is a feasible option in the future since now we have half a year to work on it
19:01:42 <dgilmore> mbriza: okay
19:01:59 <nirik> #info jsmith to chair next week
19:02:02 <nirik> thanks jsmith
19:02:09 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
19:02:15 <nirik> will close out in a min if nothing else...
19:02:21 <kalev> I have something: did we ever discuss changing the meeting time after the timezone changes?
19:02:37 <kalev> it's an hour later in my local time now and it doesn't work so well for me
19:02:58 * jsmith is fine either an hour earlier or at the current time (as long as he's not traveling)
19:03:00 <maxamillion> kalev: +1
19:03:08 <dgilmore> kalev: it does not work so well for me either anymore
19:03:17 * nirik is fine with an hour earlier
19:03:18 <kalev> I think I'd prefer an hour earlier, would that be better for you dgilmore?
19:03:20 <nirik> or this time
19:03:28 <dgilmore> kalev: yes it would be
19:04:14 <nirik> how about we file a ticket for it to get everyone's input... since many aren't here today.
19:04:29 <paragan> Can someone create whenisgood to check with all members?
19:04:35 <nirik> well, or 5 of us would be better an hour earlier, we could just do it
19:04:53 <paragan> an hour earlier is fine for me
19:05:39 <nirik> ok, lets try an hour earlier next week and see if anyone else screams
19:05:48 <nirik> jsmith: can you update the wiki for that?
19:05:53 <nirik> and I can mail the fesco list
19:06:02 <kalev> great, thanks guys
19:06:11 <dgilmore> gracias señors
19:06:25 <jsmith> nirik: Sorry, for the time change?  Sure...
19:06:36 <jsmith> nirik: I'll do it here in the next few minutes
19:06:45 <nirik> cool.
19:06:49 <nirik> thanks for coming everyone
19:06:52 <nirik> #endmeeting